Home
/
History
/
Instructions Read the question carefully and select the best answer. The residents on the Isle de Jean Charles did not accept federal grants to relocate prior to 2016 most likely because __ A. the grants would have caused residents to separate as they relocated B. the residents did not want to relocate together C. the tribe wanted residents who already relocated to come back ) D. the government did not offer residents enough money to relocate BEST: O FL-ELA.K12.EE.21, FL-ELA.K12.EE.3.1

Question

Instructions
Read the question carefully and select the best answer.
The residents on the Isle de Jean Charles did not accept federal grants to relocate prior to 2016 most likely because __
A. the grants would have caused residents to separate as they relocated
B. the residents did not want to relocate together
C. the tribe wanted residents who already relocated to come back
) D. the government did not offer residents enough money to relocate
BEST: O FL-ELA.K12.EE.21, FL-ELA.K12.EE.3.1

Instructions Read the question carefully and select the best answer. The residents on the Isle de Jean Charles did not accept federal grants to relocate prior to 2016 most likely because __ A. the grants would have caused residents to separate as they relocated B. the residents did not want to relocate together C. the tribe wanted residents who already relocated to come back ) D. the government did not offer residents enough money to relocate BEST: O FL-ELA.K12.EE.21, FL-ELA.K12.EE.3.1

expert verifiedVerification of experts

Answer

4.3263 Voting
avatar
ZaraProfessional · Tutor for 6 years

Answer

<p> A </p>

Explain

<p> This question is about a historical event involving the residents of Isle de Jean Charles. Reading the choices, we can make reasonable deductions to arrive at the best answer. <br />(A) Assuming that there's cultural or empathetic disposition for the members of the Island might want to feature is uncommon or irregular, thus, it seems plausible that the grants could separate families and/or kindred members, hence indirectly provides bonds against their relocation.<br />(B) It is mentioned that "the residents did not want to relocate together" which again goes against the context provided.<br />(C) There's no strong/compelling evidence in the text supports the argument that previous residents who relocated were being expected back. <br />(D) The case that insufficient sums were accorded as incentives backing their removal seems reliable too, bearing in mind that mass evacuation comes with consistent corresponding costs universally; it's persistent for the relocates to accept this judgment unconditionally. Nonetheless, the restraints involved, within the exceptional group's interest other than the financial dimensions, gave it an edge over all other alternatives.<br /></p>
Click to rate:

Hot Questions

More x